DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis ( i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action: A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made. The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows: 1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art. 2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue. 3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art. 4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness . Claim s 1 , 7 , and 14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bloomfield et al. US 20150030505 A1 in view of Hofen et al. US 20200109125 A1 and in further view of Prata p et al. , Thermal Analysis of Energy and Exergy of Back Pressure Steam Turbine in Sugar Cogeneration Plant, January 2014, International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, Volume 4, Issue 1, 674-682 (Year: 2014) . Regarding claim 1, Bloomfield et al. teaches an integrated plant for making propene oxide represented by “ the modular plant ” (Fig. 1, [0043]). The modular plant comprises of the following elements of the current invention: Unit for producing hydrogen peroxide represented by an anthraquinone process represented by “ the auto oxidation process (AO-process)” (Fig. 1, [0043]). A hydrogenator for hydrogenating a working solution , containing an alkylanthraquionone , an alkyltetrahydroanthraquinone , or both , with hydrogen represented by “comprising at least one hydrogenator (hydrogenation reactor) to hydrogenate the anthraquinone in the working solution” where in “ alkylanthraquinone compounds, such as 2-ethylanthraquinone, 2-amylanthraquinone, and their 5,6,7,8-tetrahydro derivatives as the working compounds dissolved in a suitable organic solvent or mixture of organic solvents. These solutions of alkylanthraquinones are referred to as working solutions ” (Fig. 1, [ 0007, 004 4 ]). An oxidizer for oxidizing a hydrogenated working solution with an oxygen containing gas represented by “comprising at least one oxidizer (oxidation reactor) to oxidize the hydrogenated anthraquinone with oxygen to from hydrogen peroxide” (Fig. 1, [004 5 ]). A n extraction column for extracting hydrogen peroxide from an oxidized working solution represented by “comprising at least one means to extract the hydrogen peroxide from the working solution (extraction unit), where in the extraction unit may be an “extraction column” (Fig. 1, [0047, 0049]). An air compressor driven by a backpressure steam turbine, a conduit connecting an outlet of the air compressor with the oxidizer of the unit for producing hydrogen peroxide represented by “ comprising at least one means to compress air (process air compressor)...to feed oxygen, in particular oxygen from the air, into [the] oxidizer” (Fig. 1, [0046]). Bloomfield et al. is silent as to the air compressor being driven by a backpressure steam turbine. However , using an air compressor driven by backpressure steam turbine compared to a process air compressor is simply substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results . Bloomfield et al. does not teach a unit for making propene oxide from propene and hydrogen peroxide, an epoxidation reactor with a feed conduit for hydrogen peroxide connected to the unit for producing hydrogen peroxide and a fixed bed of epoxidation catalyst comprising a titanium zeolite, a work-up section for separating propene oxide and optionally solvent from an epoxidation reaction mixture, or a conduit connecting the steam outlet of the backpressure steam turbine with a heat exchanger of a distillation column of the work-up section of the unit for making propene oxide. Hofen et al. teaches a unit for making propene oxide from propene and hydrogen peroxide represented by “the process of the invention” (Fig. 1, [0021]). The process of the invention comprises of the following elements of the current invention An epoxidation reactor with a feed conduit for hydrogen peroxide connected to the unit for producing hydrogen peroxide and a fixed bed of epoxidation catalyst comprising a titanium zeolite represented by “a propene feed 1 is continuously reacted with hydrogen peroxide 2 in an epoxidation reactor 3 which contains a fixed bed of titanium silicalite catalyst” (Fig. 1, [041]). The epoxidation of propene with hydrogen peroxide in the presence of an epoxidation catalyst is well known in the art. Therefore, using an epoxidation reactor with a titanium zeolite catalyst is simply combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. A work-up section for separating propene oxide and optionally solvent from an epoxidation reaction mixture represented by “an extractive distillation column” where in “purified propene oxide 59 is obtained as the overhead product” (Fig. 1, [0044]). Using a distillation column to separate or purify mixtures of liquid components is also well known in the art. Therefore, using a distillation column to separate the propene oxide is simply combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Hofen et al. does not teach a conduit connecting the steam outlet of the backpressure steam turbine with a heat exchanger of a distillation column of the work-up section of the unit for making propene oxide. Pratap et al. teaches that increasing the maximum continuous rating (MCR) of a back pressure steam turbine from 70% to 85% greatly increases its energy and exergy efficiency as well as its turbine heat rate (Conclusion) . Therefore, it would have beneficial to use an air compressor driven by a back pressure steam turbine to achieve the desired efficiency and turbine heat rate. Furthermore, it would be beneficial to connect the outlet of the backpressure steam turbine to a heat exchanger of a distillation column to create a more efficient system and to conserve energy in the overall system. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Bloomfield et al. to incorporate the teachings of Hofen et al. and the teachings of Pratap et al. to include an epoxidation reactor and a work-up section as it is a well-known method of producing and separating propene oxide. Furthermore, using an air compressor driven by a back pressure steam turbine, where in the outlet is connected to the distillation column of the work-up section, to create a more efficient and energy conserving system. Regarding claim 7, Bloom field et al. teaches the following process es of the claimed invention: Hydrogenating a working solution, containing an alkylanthraquinone , an alkyltetrahydroanthraquinone or both, with hydrogen in a hydrogenation reactor to provide a hydrogenated working solution comprising an alkylanthrahydroquinone , an alkyltetrahydroanthrahydroquinone . or both represented by “comprising at least one hydrogenator (hydrogenation reactor) to hydrogenate the anthraquinone in the working solution” where in “ alkylanthraquinone compounds, such as 2-ethylanthraquinone, 2-amylanthraquinone, and their 5,6,7,8-tetrahydro derivatives as the working compounds dissolved in a suitable organic solvent or mixture of organic solvents. These solutions of alkylanthraquinones are referred to as working solutions ” (Fig. 1, [0007, 0044]). Oxidizing the hydrogenated working solution obtained in step a) with an oxygen containing gas in an oxidation reactor to provide an oxidized working solution comprising hydrogen peroxide and an alkylanthraquinone , an alkyltetrahydroanthraquinone or both, represented by “comprising at least one oxidizer (oxidation reactor) to oxidize the hydrogenated anthraquinone with oxygen to fo r m hydrogen peroxide” (Fig. 1, [0045]). Extracting hydrogen peroxide from the oxidized working solution obtained in step b) to provide an aqueous solution of hydrogen peroxide, “comprising at least one means to extract the hydrogen peroxide from the working solution (extraction unit), where in the extraction unit may be an “extraction column” (Fig. 1, [0047, 0049]). Air is compressed with an air compressor driven by a backpressure steam turbine, a part or all of the compressed air is passed to step b) to provide a part or all of said oxygen containing gas represented by “ comprising at least one means to compress air (process air compressor)...to feed oxygen, in particular oxygen from the air, into [the] oxidizer” (Fig. 1, [0046]). Bloomfield et al. is silent as to the air compressor being driven by a backpressure steam turbine. However, using an air compressor driven by backpressure steam turbine compared to a process air compressor is simply substitution of one known element for another to obtain predictable results. Bloomfield et al. does not teach the following processes of the current invention: Reacting propene with the aqueous solution of hydrogen peroxide obtained in step c) in the presence of a titanium zeolite catalyst and a solvent to provide a reaction mixture comprising propene oxide Separating propene oxide and the solvent from the reaction mixture obtained in d) using at least one distillation column and a part or all of the steam exiting the backpressure steam turbine is used to supply heat to the at least one distillation column of e) Hofen et al. teaches the following processes of the current invention: Reacting propene with the aqueous solution of hydrogen peroxide obtained in step c) in the presence of a titanium zeolite catalyst and a solvent to provide a reaction mixture comprising propene oxide represented by “a propene feed 1 is continuously reacted with hydrogen peroxide 2 in an epoxidation reactor 3 which contains a fixed bed of titanium silicalite catalyst” (Fig. 1, [041]). The epoxidation of propene with hydrogen peroxide in the presence of an epoxidation catalyst is well known in the art. Therefore, using an epoxidation reactor with a titanium zeolite catalyst is simply combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Separating propene oxide and the solvent from the reaction mixture obtained in d) using at least one distillation column represented by by “an extractive distillation column” where in “purified propene oxide 59 is obtained as the overhead product” (Fig. 1, [0044]). Using a distillation column to separate or purify mixtures of liquid components is also well known in the art. Therefore, using a distillation column to separate the propene oxide is simply combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Hofen et al. does not teach part or all of the steam exiting the backpressure steam turbine is used to supply heat to the at least one distillation column of e) . Pratap et al. teaches that increasing the maximum continuous rating (MCR) of a back pressure steam turbine from 70% to 85% greatly increases its energy and exergy efficiency as well as its turbine heat rate (Conclusion). Therefore, it would have beneficial to use an air compressor driven by a back pressure steam turbine to achieve the desired efficiency and turbine heat rate. Furthermore, it would be beneficial to use part or all of the steam exiting the backpressure steam turbine is used to supply heat to the at least one distillation column of e). to create a more efficient system and to conserve energy in the overall system. Regarding claim 14, Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al and in further view of Pratap et al. teaches all the claim limitations of claim 7. Hofen et al. further teaches the solvent used in d) being selected from a group consisting og methanol, 2-propanol, acetonitrile, and mixtures thereof represented by “the reaction is carried out in a methanol solvent 4 ” [0041]. Hofen et al. further teaches a distillation column separating the solvent as an overhead product represented by “w hen a methanol solvent is used in step a), the liquid mixture remaining after the pressure reduction is preferably separated by distillation ” [0036] . The reference is silent as to the steam exiting the backpressure steam turbine being used to heat the distillation column. However, it is well known in the art distillation columns operate by heat exchangers. Therefore recycling the steam exiting the backpressure steam turbine to supply heat to the distillation column is simply combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Claim s 2 , 4, 5 , 8 and 9 FILLIN "Insert the claim numbers which are under rejection." \d "[ 1 ]" are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bloomfield et al. US 20150030505 A1 in view of Hofen et al. US 20200109125 A1 and in further view of Prata p et al. , Thermal Analysis of Energy and Exergy of Back Pressure Steam Turbine in Sugar Cogeneration Plant, January 2014, International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, Volume 4, Issue 1, 674-682 (Year: 2014) and in further view of Zhou et al. US 20020106320 A1. Regarding claim 2, Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al and in further view of Pratap et al. teaches all the claim limitations of claim 1. Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al and in further view of Pratap et al. does not teach the air compressor comprising of a first compression unit and a second compression unit, the conduit connection an outlet of the air compressor with the oxidizer of the unit for producing hydrogen peroxide is connected to the first compression unit, and an outlet of the second compression unit is connected to an inlet of an additional air separator. Bloomfield et al. teaches an air compressor connected with the oxidizer of the unit for producing hydrogen peroxide represented by “ comprising at least one means to compress air (process air compressor)...to feed oxygen, in particular oxygen from the air, into [the] oxidizer” (Fig. 1, [0046]). The reference is silent to the air compression unit comprising of a first compression unit and a second compression unit. However, the reference states “at least one means to compress air.” Therefore, incorporating a first compression unit and a second compression unit is merely a duplication of parts. Zhou et al. teaches an additional air separation unit represented by “unreacted gas fraction is treated…using a separation method selected from membrane separation, absorption, adsorption, cryogenic distillation, and combinations thereof ” (Claim 17) . The additional air separation unit is beneficial to “recover unreacted hydrogen/oxygen” (Claim 17). Zhou et al. is silent as to a conduit connecting the outlet of the second compression unit to the inlet of the additional air separation unit. However, it is well known in the are that compressed air plays a crucial role in air separation processes by increasing the pressure of the air. Therefore, connecting the outlet of the second compression unit with the inlet of the additional air separation unit is simply combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al. and in further view of Pratap et al. to incorporate the teachings of Zhou et al. to include an additional air separation unit to recover and recycle unreacted hydrogen/oxygen. Regarding claim 4, Zhou et al. teaches a conduit connected an outlet of the additional air separation unit for gas enriched in oxygen with an inlet of the oxidizer of the unit for producing hydrogen peroxide represented by “u nreacted gas fraction is treated for recovering unreacted hydrogen and/or oxygen for recycle back to the catalytic reacto r” (Claim 17). Regarding claim 5, Zhou et al. teaches the additional air separation unit comprising of a cryogenic air separation unit represented by “ unreacted gas fraction is treated…using a separation method selected from membrane separation, absorption, adsorption, cryogenic distillation, and combinations thereof ” (Claim 17). Regarding claim 8, Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al and in further view of Pratap et al. teaches all the claim limitations of claim 7. Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al and in further view of Pratap et al. does not teach the air compressor is a two-stage compressor, compressed air from a [[the]] first compression unit is passed as oxygen containing gas to step b), compressed air from a [[the]] second compression unit is passed to an air separation unit providing a gas stream enriched in nitrogen and a gas stream enriched in oxygen, and all or a part of the gas stream enriched in nitrogen is passed to step d) or to step e) or to both steps d) and e) to prevent formation of flammable gas mixtures. Bloomfield et al. teaches an air compressor connected with the oxidizer of the unit for producing hydrogen peroxide represented by “ comprising at least one means to compress air (process air compressor)...to feed oxygen, in particular oxygen from the air, into [the] oxidizer” (Fig. 1, [0046]). The reference is silent to the air compression unit comprising of a first compression unit and a second compression unit. However, the reference states “at least one means to compress air.” Therefore, incorporating a first compression unit and a second compression unit is merely a duplication of parts. Zhou et al. teaches an additional air separation unit represented by “unreacted gas fraction is treated…using a separation method selected from membrane separation, absorption, adsorption, cryogenic distillation, and combinations thereof” (Claim 17). The additional air separation unit is beneficial to “recover unreacted hydrogen/oxygen” (Claim 17). Furthermore, it is well known in the art the separation methods can configured to have a gas stream enriched in nitrogen and oxygen, or any desired gas. Zhou et al. is silent as to a gas stream rich in nitrogen being passed to d ) or e) or to both d) and e) to prevent formation of flammable gas mixtures. However, Hofen teaches “ inert gas fed to the trickle bed reactor … to maintain an essentially constant oxygen concentration in the purge gas stream. This embodiment prevents formation of flammable gas mixtures in the epoxidation reactor …” ( Hofen [0039]). Hofen further teaches ” t he inert gas is preferably selected from nitrogen ” [0027]. Therefore, the air separation unit having a gas stream enriched in nitrogen being passed to d) or e) or to both d) and e) is simply combining prior art elements to known methods to yield predictable results. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al. and in further view of Pratap et al. to incorporate the teachings of Zhou et al. to include an additional air separation unit to recover and recycle unreacted hydrogen/oxygen , and to send all or part of a gas stream rich in nitrogen to d) or e) or to both d) and e) to help prevent formation of flammable gas mixtures. Regarding claim 9, Zhou et al. teaches all or part of the gas stream enriched in oxygen being passed to b) to provide oxygen containing gas represented by “u nreacted gas fraction is treated for recovering unreacted hydrogen and/or oxygen for recycle back to the catalytic reacto r” (Claim 17). Claim 3 FILLIN "Insert the claim numbers which are under rejection." \d "[ 1 ]" i s rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bloomfield et al. US 20150030505 A1 in view of Hofen et al. US 20200109125 A1 and in further view of Prata p et al. , Thermal Analysis of Energy and Exergy of Back Pressure Steam Turbine in Sugar Cogeneration Plant, January 2014, International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, Volume 4, Issue 1, 674-682 (Year: 2014) and in further view of Zhou et al. US 20020106320 A1 and in further view of Riedel et al. US 20160176835 A1. Regarding claim 3, Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al. and in further view of Pratap et al. and in further view of Zhou et al. teaches all the claim limitations of claim 2. Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al. and in further view of Pratap et al. and in further view of Zhou et al. does not teach a conduit connecting the outlet of the additional air separation unit for oxygen depleted gas with the unit for making propene oxide. Riedel et al. teaches a “oxygen depleted stream to be recycled to one or more stages” of the propene oxide unit [0274]. Therefore, it would be beneficial to connect a conduit of the additional air separation unit for oxygen depleted gas with the unit for making propene oxide to recycle and save costs. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al. and in further view of Pratap et al. and in further view of Zhou et al. to incorporate the teachings of Riedel et al. to connect a conduit of the additional air separation unit for oxygen depleted gas with the unit for making propene oxide to recycle and save costs. Claim s 6 and 13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bloomfield et al. US 20150030505 A1 in view of Hofen et al. US 20200109125 A1 and in further view of Prata p et al. , Thermal Analysis of Energy and Exergy of Back Pressure Steam Turbine in Sugar Cogeneration Plant, January 2014, International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, Volume 4, Issue 1, 674-682 (Year: 2014) and in further view of Drnevich et al. US 20100158776 A1. Regarding claim 6, Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al. and in further view of Pratap et al. teaches all the claim limitation of claim 1. Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al. and in further view of Pratap et al. does not teach a steam reforming unit for producing hydrogen from methane, the steam reforming unit comprising a steam reformer and a steam generator heated by product gas exiting the steam reformer, a conduit connecting a hydrogen outlet of the steam reforming unit with an inlet of the hydrogenator of the unit for producing hydrogen peroxide, and a conduit connecting a steam outlet of the steam generator with an inlet of the backpressure steam turbine. Drnevich et al. teaches the following: A steam reformer unit represented by steam methane reforming installation 1 (Fig. 1, [0022]). A steam reforming unit represented by “steam methane reformer 48 ” which “convert[s] the methane content thereof to produce additional hydrogen” (Fig. 1, [0048]). Producing additional hydrogen is beneficial to lower operating costs and need for external substances. A steam generator represented by “ low pressure steam generators could be used in lieu of feed heater 20 ” (Fig. 1, [0047]). Having a low pressure steam generator is beneficial to help heat transfer in the steam reforming unit. Drnevich et al. is silent as to a conduit f rom the hydrogen outlet of the stream reforming unit connected to the inlet of the hydrogenator of the unit for producing hydrogen peroxide. However, it is well known in the art that a h ydrogenator operates by introducing hydrogen to a compound or solution , in this case to the working solution. Therefore, connecting the hydrogen outlet of the steam reforming unit to the inlet of the hydrogenator of the unit for producing hydrogen peroxide is simply combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. Drnevich et al. is silent as to a conduit connecting a steam outlet of the steam generator with an inlet of the backpressure steam turbine. However, it is well known in the art that backpressure steam turbine s operate by steam entering the turbine inlet. Therefore, connecting the steam outlet of the steam generator with the inlet of the backpressure steam turbine is simply combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al. and in further view of Pratap et al. to incorporate the teachings of Drnevich et al. to include a steam reforming unit to help lower operating costs and a steam generator to help heat transfer in the steam reforming unit . Regarding claim 13, Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al. and in further view of Pratap et al. teaches all the claim limitation of claim 7. Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al. and in further view of Pratap et al. does not teach f) reacting a natural gas or methane with water in the presence of a steam reforming catalyst with recovery of heat in a steam generator, providing a reaction mixture comprising hydrogen and g) separating hydrogen from the reaction mixture of f) wherein steam generated in f) is used to drive said backpressure steam turbine and hydrogen separated in g) is passed to a). Drnevich et al. teaches a natural gas or methane with water in the presence of a steam reforming catalyst with recovery of heat in a steam generator providing a reaction mixture comprising hydrogen represented by steam methane reformer 48 where in “[the] reformer tubes contain a catalyst to promote the steam methane reforming reactions in which steam is reacted with the hydrocarbons to produce hydrogen, carbon monoxide, water and carbon dioxide ” [0005]). This is beneficial to create hydrogen and reduce operating costs and there is a lesser need for outside resources. Drnevich et al. further teaches hydrogen separated in g) being passed to a) represented by “a steam methane reformer produces a synthesis gas in which hydrogen can be separated or used in downstream chemical processes ” [0005]. This is beneficial as the process can use the hydrogen generated and reduce operating costs and there is a lesser need for outside resources. Drnevich et al. is silent as the steam generated in f) being used to drive the backpressure steam turbine. However, it is well known in the art that backpressure steam turbines operate by steam entering the turbine inlet. Therefore, connecting the steam outlet of the steam generator with the inlet of the backpressure steam turbine is simply combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al. and in further view of Pratap et al. to incorporate the teachings of Drnevich et al. to include f) reacting a natural gas or methane with water in the presence of a steam reforming catalyst with recovery of heat in a steam generator, providing a reaction mixture comprising hydrogen and g) separating hydrogen from the reaction mixture of f) wherein steam generated in f) is used to drive said backpressure steam turbine and hydrogen separated in g) is passed to a) to help reduce operating costs and for there to be a lesser need for outside resources. Claim 10 FILLIN "Insert the claim numbers which are under rejection." \d "[ 1 ]" is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Bloomfield et al. US 20150030505 A1 in view of Hofen et al. US 20200109125 A1 and in further view of Prata p et al. , Thermal Analysis of Energy and Exergy of Back Pressure Steam Turbine in Sugar Cogeneration Plant, January 2014, International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering, Volume 4, Issue 1, 674-682 (Year: 2014) and in further view of Zhou et al. US 20020106320 A1 and in further view of Drnevich et al. US 20100158776 A1. Regarding claim 10, Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al. and in further view of Pratap et al. and in further view of Zhou et al. teaches all the claim limitation of claim 8. Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al. and in further view of Pratap et al. and in further view of Zhou et al. does not teach all or a part of the gas stream enriched in oxygen being used to oxidize an off-gas generated in d) or in e) or off gasses of both d) and e). Drnevich et al. teaches that off-gas streams can be oxidized represented by “ off gas stream 24 react with oxygen and steam to produce reacted stream 36 with a hydrocarbon content that preferably consists of methane ” (Fig. 1, [0028]). This is beneficial as the methane in this system can be recycled and reused to produce more hydrogen. Therefore, having the gas stream enriched in oxygen being used to oxidize an off gas generated in d) or e) or off gasses of both d) and e) is simply combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield predictable results. It would have been prima facie obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Bloomfield et al. in view of Hofen et al. and in further view of Pratap et al. and in further view of Zhou et al. to incorporate the teachings of Drnevich et al. to having the gas stream enriched in oxygen being used to oxidize an off gas generated in d) or e) or off gasses of both d) and e) to produce byproduct that may be recyclable or reusable in the system. Allowable Subject Matter Claims 11 and 12 objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims. The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter: Claim 11 would be allowable as the prior art fails to teach all or a part of the gas stream enriched in oxygen being used to oxidize a waste water generated in e). Claim 12 would be allowable as the prior art fails to teach the backpressure steam turbine being operated from 0.6 to 4.0 MPa. Conclusion The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Bolz et al. US 20220298128 A1 is eligible prior art under 35 U.S.C 102(a)(2). However, there is a shared applicant between the prior art and the current invention. Examiner requests disclosure on the record regarding ownership for compact prosecution. Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to FILLIN "Examiner name" \* MERGEFORMAT AMMAD BUTT whose telephone number is FILLIN "Phone number" \* MERGEFORMAT (571)272-6550 . The examiner can normally be reached FILLIN "Work Schedule?" \* MERGEFORMAT M-Th, 7-5PM . Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, FILLIN "SPE Name?" \* MERGEFORMAT Jennifer Dieterle can be reached at FILLIN "SPE Phone?" \* MERGEFORMAT (571) 270-7872 . The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /AMMAD W BUTT/ Examiner, Art Unit 1776 /Jennifer Dieterle/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1776